About your Search

20121027
20121104
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
was elected as a representative 2010. he served as an investment counsel for the u.s. government reform committee. gentlemen, welcome. it's good to have you here. gentleman you are now both on record as saying you would be open to raising revenue as part of plan to balance the budget and congressman's dold your opponent says as a general proposition he supports 70% and cuts versus 30% in new revenues. what percentage breakdowns would you support? dold: i'm not so sure i have a percentage breakdown. what i've done his work with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the only bipartisan budget that has come to the florida generation and frankly i think that is what we need to be talking about. need to be talking about how we can get folks together republicans and democrats alike running an organization i know that the only successful organizations are those that come together and actually solve problems and have some sort of compromise. >> moderator: you were asked if you would accept a 1 dollar increase for
. making demands on their government, demands for transparency and accountability. if they do not find alternatives, they could be in trouble. if you have a business, to help us solve this saudi arabia problem, you would be in a competitive position. this is not a theory. it works. i had the opportunity last week to congratulate ceo of electro- motor diesel, now part of the caterpillar company, on a contract for locomotives. a little over two years ago, a previous executive was in my office bemoaning the reality that he was about to lose a competitive bid to another country based on costs. even though we have had provided advocacy to the ministry on its behalf. he was sure that the contract award would be on price. when i asked him for his value proposition, he had little to offer other than our locomotives are better than theirs. they lost. fortunately, the saudi arabians agreed to take the winning entry on approval basis for two years. so they had a chance. a new team came forward and we discussed at length what it takes to win. the principles are fairly straightforward. first, find
end willing to listen to governments but requests not to publish -- are we looking at kind of a new era because of the internet, the fragmentation of the media environment? what kind of challenges might there be for the classification receipt -- regime and for prosecutors going for? >> you mean, a broader journalist puts that's one question. it certainly complicates the issue. let's put it that way. a blogger is not the gray lady of the new york times. that's all i have to say about the subject. [laughter] >> put your finger on today's challenge. this is not just worrying about the occasional article that shows up in the front page of the post and the new york times. your thinking about now whole new types of journalists or media that don't operate under the constraints that are traditional media do. and i give a lot of credit to the "washington post" and the others. when they have classified information that they think would it -- jeopardize information to believe they bring the fact that they have that information to the government and say, look, make the case for why we should no
, not the u.s. government, because i'm about to hammer them. we do not have the kind of leadership that required to have coalitions put together to deal with this situation. it is a soft power or hard power. and it may not happen properly anytime in the near future your remember that caveat. now, the other day i was reading through a book by save the children. it's about the children of syria. and if you haven't read this book and you want to understand what's happening in syria, i recommend you read it. but i assure you, you will feel very uncomfortable on page one. there are costs involved with the situation that could go on for generations, not just for now. generations. think about the children are going through now and how they will think about the west. the international community, their arab brothers, the reins, the russians, the chinese, the united states, and just about everyone else. even if this might be over in the next year or so, it will definitely not be over for those children. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. ambassador? >> i agree with most of what i heard from
. host: is a short amount of your district, the sixth district, talk about what the federal government is point to do and whether there will be enough funding for the damage out there in new jersey and up and down the east coast. guest: we have got to make sure there is enough funding. this is like to take emergency appropriations bill to pay for. there's not enough money for disaster relief. there's got to be an emergency appropriation. i think it has to be robust enough to cover all of this. it is going to be very costly. just looking at where i was yesterday, yesterday i went to bellmawr, new jersey to look at the damage. you have all of the sand that washed away from the beach. you are talking about beach replenishment. and all of the damage to homes. some people have insurance. but for those who do not, or if their insurance is not complete enough to provide insurance, the federal government has got to help out. and i am certain that we will pass an appropriations bill to cover this, but it will be in the billions of dollars. i hope our colleagues on both sides of the aisle unders
with government, you will shut up. we just don't see much except that the piece published in "the wall street journal" a few weeks ago. >> i mean come on someone with some of those cases. they go back now about five or six years. i think in the middle of the bush administration i've talked to some of the flag officers, retired flag officers, who got phone calls, threatening that their pension rights were going to be under review and things like that. i think it was a completely outrageous statement at this and why -- i think obviously serving military officers is one thing, and didn't have all sorts of obligations that they limit directly their participation in public debate, public discussion. but once they are retired and completely free to speak, and i think they can play a meaningful role in public debate conversation. and then to use the power of government to silence them is completely outrageous. >> they're not completely legally free. >> secrets. >> they will all have signed, you know, agreements not to talk about classified material, even postretirement. and there, too, i would just
financial company and to complete the government at divestiture the idea would be that the enterprise could be recapitalized by creditors and the financial company receiving a combination of cash, equity or debt in satisfaction of the claims against the receivership. the strategy has the advantage of returning the company to private ownership and insurers as possible avoiding an even bigger too big to fail company. it also would likely promote the stability in the financial markets of the mandates. a few words about international cooperation because that's certainly been a big issue in connection with how we going to do this? there is a lot of work done. certainly in the recent financial crisis that has been increased awareness on the degree to which these large financial companies operate across the borders. and so, obviously the resolution has to be coordinated internationally to reduce the risk of disruption. so, there is no current international insolvency framework to resolve a global the systemically important financial institution in a comprehensive manner so we really need to do adv
, the government already announced that some 500 will have been withdrawn by the end of this year. next year to take further decisions which the government has not yet taken, and you have to ask the defense secretary, you know, when he thinks that's possible. >> we are talking a time line of slightly more than two years, so i think things can change. i recognize that. >> yeah. i think the prime minister said what they're looking for is a glide past the end of 2014. the government will take those decisions when it's ready. >> what events will clearly dictate political decisions, not asking you to comment on political decisions, but dictate what happens -- >> i can give you confidence the figures announced by the prime minister out by december, that will be delivered. we'll be done. >> thank you very much. my last question, chairman, is is there any -- anybody heard anything about possibility of nato or the united states in particular? withdrawing significant troops earlier than the end of 2014? >> i think the united states also will want to take some provisions next year, and in light of the
on it now i will do nothing. that will be protected. that's between the government and the them. that's protected. but all i had some plans that will save it for the long haul and i will end at that. you're very gracious with time. smith: de leggitt rebuttal time? >> moderator: how much you need? how about 15 seconds. smith: the most radical proposals in the congress and the senate any way that a grand total of 16 votes was the so-called rand paul plan. the rhine and budget has all kind of problems because when it comes to medicare, this is a basic debate about ending the medicare guaranteed benefit preserving my record indicates not just preserving but strengthen. >> moderator: monica ag you have the last question. >> because of the economic downturn, the education in our country has had to squeeze from every angle, city budgets for education have dropped, state budgets have dropped, so it makes it challenging most experts would say to believe our students in the future will be competing on a level playing field with other students around the world because the bigger class size is no
think that there is going to be a mentality to get the government spending any money at all because -- i would agree to this point if there is not enough money i think we could drive more efficient cars and we could change the power plants but if there isn't a profit of changing to natural gas, companies won't do it. they are not going to lose money to change their power plant over to natural gas. the afton de subsidize. i think it is a sad day because america needs to admit climate change is real and we don't have the money to fix it. i don't have the answer for you but it's ignorant to ignore it. >> host: that's john of the mexico. the presidential candidates were sidelined on the storm from campaigning six days ago before next tuesday's election and here is the headline on the "the washington times" romney balances sympathy and politics to raise donations here's what he had to say about the rally yesterday. i proceed affect people in dayton got up this morning, some went to the grocery store and purchased some things that these families will need, and i appreciate your generosity. it'
- stabilizing influence, and mason governments are facing government. and these opportunists are may be unpredictable. and i was use iraq as an example. there were lots of opportunists and iraq. iran, turkey, saudi arabia, kuwait, nonstate actors all opportunists trying to get finish of a situation or how to set project itself around the world? what does it mean to us as we look for the future conflicts? the character of conflict is changing by the operational environment conflict is change. but in my mind the fundamental nature of work remains the same. that's the struggle to influence populations in governance. that has not changed. so it's how we continue to understand that struggle within the new operational environment and context that we see it. the army has great 237 years ago to defend this nation comes to the interests of states abroad, and in my opinion that imperative has not changed. so as i got a force for the future, the one thing i tell everyone is that we're starting from a position of strength. and why do i say that? because of the army specifically with the most com
.s. invasion and the toppling of hussein -- pusan -- a secular liberal government that was willing to cede some of its sovereign rights to a foreign power. some claim it's all different now with the islamic republic because the arab awakening, the demonstration effect will work together with sanctions to find the break the back of the islamic republic. but this ignores the fact that the islamic republic sees the arab awakening as hugely positive, hugely positive. iranian policymakers and analysts believe that any arab government, any arab government that becomes at all more representative of its populations beliefs, concerns and policy preferences will, by definition, be less enthusiastic about strategic cooperation with the united states, let alone with israel, and more open to iran's message of foreign policy independence. what policy elites here ms., is the islamic republic does not need governments to be more pro-iranian. that's not what they need. they just need these governments to be less pro-american, less pro-israel and more independent. but you often hear in washington in particular t
's never been a tax cut in the history of the new york city government. this is the first time it happened. [laughter] every single mayor in the past, including republicans, raised taxes. well, i did it then for eight years. ultimately, we got some really big tax cuts, and ended up being $3 billion to $4 billion in tax cuts, and we collected more revenues from the lower taxes than the higher taxes because that energized the economy. it took money out of the wasted pocket of the city and put it in the hands of people who actually spend money in a productive and sensible way that produces jobs. it was not the only thing that turned around the economy of new york city, but here's the difference. started with 10.5%. i left with 5.5% unemployment. i started with 5.1 million on welfare and left with 500,000 left on welfare. the population was 7 million when i started, and i left with 8.1 million people. a lot of that had to do with the fact we energized a private sector. that's the difference of what's going to happen with taxes, depending on the choice the american people make on november 6th.
. government is one -- you started in government. you were the inspector general of health and human services. the legislative leadership in california hired a bunch of journalists out of the press corps to put them in office -- they figure out stories that have not gotten a lot of attention. there are reporters working in l.a. county for the board of supervisors -- they have journalistic blogs or even internally. does that have value? can the government be doing this? can you be doing journalism from government? >> no. i do not think you can be doing government from in -- journalism from in government. the inspector general is supposed to be a -- apolitical, and that was not totally the case, to be totally frank. i do not know what it is like now, but when i worked there during the clinton administration it was absolutely not apolitical. people make decisions about what it will find, what you will do. i was told that during the bush administration the oig would write reports. that are be completely redlined and turned into a one page memo if it did not fall on certain lines. so i do not thi
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)